Jump to content

Dame Deco

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dame Deco

  1. 1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:


    I don't know who the local hider with a terrific reputation is in Australia, but looking at the logs makes me realise why they want their identity kept secret. These caches were published just two months ago:






    From the logs, it appears that these are all Eclipse mint tins which aren't waterproof to start with and, in the coastal subtropical environment in which they're hidden, quickly turn to this:




    Given the description, the size being listed as Other and all being D2.5, this comes across at best as a sick joke. At least when a local cacher hides these things under their own name, the community can point them towards more suitable containers and if they ignore that advice they deserve the reputation they get, but the anonymity of this series I'm afraid just leaves a very sour taste in the mouth.


    I accept that the reviewers are limited in what they can do and have to publish them if they meet the guidelines, but maybe those guidelines need to be strengthened when it comes to anonymous hides scattered far and wide.


    Thank you thank you thank you for posting this!  Exactly!


    ETA:  went through and read the Australia logs--it's a total bait and switch.  And I had the exact same reaction in Ohio--? container, 2.5 D, cache description--I was excited to go look for it, then it's a total dud.  Nice to know that's how they feel down under, too.  Sick joke, indeed.

    • Upvote 3
  2. 9 minutes ago, ecanderson said:

    You haven't got or don't supply us with all of the pertinent facts for this 'other' account that you say got the short end of the stick, so there is absolutely no way to compare the two instances that you find in conflict in your earlier posts that complain of a double standard by gc.com.  Unless you intend to have the guidelines changed, the account that Keystone has addressed seems very odd, but well within the guidelines.





    I do believe he told you that it was Team Sagebrushers.  Don't bother using the site search--just google geocaching and Team Sagebrushers.  They had 24,000 caches in Nevada and other parts west.  I'm not sure I agree that it's the same situation.  But I really hate a 1000-cache series that's only growing and spreading with fake D/T ratings.

    • Upvote 4
    • Funny 1
  3. 25 minutes ago, niraD said:

    And yet you somehow seem to think the volunteer reviewers could do more to keep something you don't like "corralled"...


    Anybody who simply looked at the account before publishing one of the caches in Europe could have seen that there were over 500 caches placed the same day with the exact same D/T rating and almost no favorite points.  But...probably not their job.  This is more about Groundspeak than the reviewers.  Pretty nice racket for them--volunteer reviewers,volunteer hiders, volunteer finders...all they have to do is rake in the cache by selling merchandise.  I don't want to derail the thread, though--this is just a response to Nira. :)

    • Upvote 2
  4. 10 minutes ago, terratin said:




    And besides, what's going on in this thread? Are you all jealous that someone is allowed to place caches you weren't allowed to place? Keystone has said it's all fine. I'm not a fan of this, but just ignore it. Just as much as I ignore power trails or most mysteries. Nobody forces you to find these caches. Seriously, sometimes I despair about the caching community. *shakes head* :drama:


    We're just grumbling a bit with like-minded people.  That is one of the purposes of a forum, is it not? :)  No despair needed on your part, nor on ours. :)

    • Upvote 2
    • Funny 4
    • Surprised 1
  5. 1 minute ago, Keystone said:


    If you pay my expenses to visit your cache prior to publication, I will gladly double-check and correct the difficulty and terrain ratings you selected.  This can only be done by visiting the site.  I would only agree to take on this role if my decisions were final and unappealable.


    The last guardrail cache cache I found was accurately rated at 3.5/1.5 - it has a 40% DNF rate.  The last highway rest area cache I found was accurately rated at 3.5/2, which I discovered after shimmying my fat self underneath an information kiosk, and then searched several minutes for a nano inside the enclosed space.


    Brother, these ain't that! :D


    But, yes, I understand the difficulties of your job.

    • Upvote 1
  6. I guess I just think it's one thing to have a joke high D cache or two, and of course people make mistakes.  But to have a whole series of "most awesome of all time" with fake DTs that are mostly guard rails and LPCs--and spreading from Ohio to the world?  Meh...


    Now that they are spreading so widely, they are more and more likely to be among newbies first caches.  They might think the hobby is lame.  I would think Groundspeak wouldn't be happy about that.  I just don't think this series is any great ambassador for the sport.  They should have kept it corralled as a local thing.

    • Upvote 4
    • Funny 2
    • Love 1
  7. On 7/19/2020 at 1:42 PM, Keystone said:

    1.  There is a grand total of one Community Volunteer Reviewer on the organizing committee for Midwest Geobash.  That person has not hidden any of the Doctor Alien caches.

    2.  I can only speak for the Doctor Alien caches that I've personally reviewed and published, but the local hiders/caretakers have terrific reputations as cache hiders and cache maintainers in their local area.

    3.  Geocaching HQ is well aware of the Doctor Alien account and their hiding plan.  This topic has been discussed in our Reviewers' forum.

    4.  The person/persons behind the Doctor Alien account have not done anything to violate the website terms of use such that the account would be in danger of suspension, either temporarily or permanently.  I personally enjoy a positive, transparent relationship with the person/persons behind the Doctor Alien account.  I have never felt abused, lied to or threatened.


    Can you tell my why this account is allowed to publish hundreds and hundreds of caches with completely fake D/T ratings?  All are rated 2.5 difficulty when the vast majority are simple LPCs.  It's total baloney that makes the whole hobby look like a farce.

    • Upvote 2
    • Funny 1
    • Helpful 3
  8. 6 hours ago, L0ne.R said:


    Absolutely agree. It adds another layer of fun and anticipation. I've found some very interesting things in caches. I've also had fun for a couple of years by collecting those plastic animals. I had no use for them (except I used a few for some craft/art projects),  but it added to the fun. How many different animals could I collect? Will the next box have an animal I don't currently have. 




    A few years ago, a I had a HUGE rubber ducky collection that I got from caches!  Now it helped that we had a local cacher who liked to leave rubber ducks!  But I found them all across the US, too.  It was a lot of fun being on the look out for them.

    • Upvote 1
  9. 1 hour ago, dprovan said:

    I had to stop and consider whether you were seriously asking this question since the answer seems obvious to me. I can't speak for the person you were asking, but my opinion is that people bother with ammo cans because they're fun. They provide entirely different hide and seek characteristics. As the game has gotten away from the whole concept of caches being caches in the traditional meaning of the word, what can be put inside the container has become unimportant, but that doesn't nullify the value in the different experience of a finding a larger container. You might as well ask why anyone bothers to hide anything except uncamoed bison tubes.


    I agree with you 100%!  I should have done the multi-quote thing--I was responding to someone who quoted me, etc.--the person seemed to imply that ammo cans were for kids only, etc.  I love larger containers and wish everything in the woods was an ammo can!  There's nothing like opening up an ammo can in the woods and seeing what's inside--

    • Upvote 1
    • Love 1
  10. On 5/16/2020 at 3:18 AM, barefootjeff said:


    I don't put swag in my higher terrain-rated caches as they're meant to be adult hiking adventures to places of hopefully awe-inspiring natural beauty, not toy swap-shops for kids. Two are in national parks where caches aren't allowed to have anything in them apart from an information card, logbook, pen/pencil and a pencil-sharpener. There are plenty of kid-friendly caches about for those who prefer that sort of thing.


    Why bother with ammo cans, then?  Or do you?  If you're saying that your higher terrains are smalls and micros, that's fine.  But you're kind of misrepresenting the point of my post which is simply to say that an ammo can doesn't guarantee anything about the cache--didn't back then, doesn't now.

    • Upvote 1
  11. I started caching in 2010.  The number of wet, moldy logs outnumbered the number of nice, dry ones even then.  Also--found plenty of trash in larger caches, as well as empty ammo cans with nothing but a log.  And as for more hiking back then, that's generally true, perhaps--but I always point to Mingo as proof of truly lame places for a cache right from the start.

    • Upvote 4
  12. Buttermilk--the thrill of something so old and linked to the earliest days of US History, https://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=LX4113

    Dayton Harris Gravity Station--the rarest kind of disk, and it's in the middle of Death Valley!  I was FTF on a benchmarking challenge (find 10 of the 11 kinds of disks), but darn it I just didn't want to find them all even though I'd already completed the challenge!  I had a great trip to Nevada and California and explored Death Valley just so I could find that benchmark, https://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.aspx?PID=GS0206



  13. 1 hour ago, Team Microdot said:

    I'm not sure it was a good idea to have these new virtuals at all - it seems to have caused upset and brought out the worst in some people :(

    I heard a tale that a when a local CO who owned a number of virtuals sadly passed away there was a scramble for his virtuals within minutes of the news being announced.

    I'm very happy that any new virtuals in my local area weren't allocated on the basis of the number of cache hides belonging to a particular CO.

    Virtuals can't be adopted.  Not sure what you are referring to.  How could people scramble for his virtuals?

  14. On 8/18/2017 at 1:27 PM, Amygdaloid said:

    Here is another web based option you can try: http://tbagodev.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html

    There are maps by marker type (Benchmark, Triangulation Station, Gravity Station, Bolts, Etc.) or you can look at all marks types together.


    You can filter the maps by any of the attributes shown below in the popup, including the First Recovered Date using the slider bar at the bottom of the map.. You don't need to have an account to view the maps, but if you sign up for a free account you can customize the maps and save your filters with your personalized settings. The popup also has links to the NGS datasheet and the Geocaching page.. Give it a try and let me know what you think.




    Wow!  What a great site!  Thanks so much for posting this!  I do miss the old app, I loved that app.  But this site is very helpful, love it!

  15. 8 hours ago, Team Microdot said:

    Forgive me - that does sound to me like a pointless exercise.


    much like geocaching?  According to my mother, anyway-- lol!  It's not really pointless--I don't think GS would reinstate it.  I'm not sure the person would even appeal the deletion.  It just seems like common sense that you log caches after you find them.  Anything else is a farce.

  16. I would personally delete the log.  The person could appeal to Groundspeak, Groundspeak could reinstate it, and then I would just let it go and forget about it.  Deleting it would satisfy my understanding of geocaching--visit, then log.  If the powers that be reinstated it, I would shrug and try to forget about it.  But at least I would be true to myself.  I have had 12 EarthCaches published.

    • Upvote 1
  17. I advise deleting it.  They didn't actually do your Earthcache because you hadn't even created it yet.  Letting someone log an EC even if they missed a question or two after making an honest effort after visiting is one thing, allowing someone to give only half the answers based on a visit from years ago is totally different.  Apples and oranges.  It isn't truly ONLY about the lesson--perhaps the lesson is 90-95% of it.  But it isn't geocaching if folks can just log any virtual or EC they like because they visited the spot years before.  That's sort of a farce.  Folks can cheat, but if they flat out say they're cheating, then delete their log.  You worked hard to create that EarthCache, folks who want to claim it as a find should also put the effort in to visit and answer your questions.

  18. Don't bushwhack until you're absolutely sure no trail will take you closer by curving around, etc.  I've gotten into a lot of poison ivy, prickers, and like that by bushwhacking way before I needed, too.  Most geocaches aren't really that far off the trail--some are, but most aren't.  Read previous logs for the caches and see what folks say.  A direct route is often not the best route.

    • Upvote 2
  19. I always start with virtuals and earthcaches--pick ones I want.  Then I look for oldies in the area--any earlier than 2004?  Then I go to favorite points.  Also--look for larges and regular ones.  Then I pick up whatever is close to what I want.  Any charter members in the Denver area?  Look for caches by the oldtimers.  Those are my starting points, then I take any P&Gs I want along the way.

    • Upvote 2
  • Create New...